Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Above is a video of the “moderate” Imam Suhaib Webb of the Islamic Society of Boston dismissing secularism as a “radical lunatic ideology,” which means that he is dismissing the idea that the government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, and embracing the idea that the law of Allah constitutes the only legitimate constitution and government. Hardly “moderate.” But you will never read about that in the Boston Globe. On the contrary, the hopelessly clueless and compromised Boston Globe “reporter” Lisa Wangsness wrote an egregious puff piece on him in May 2013, right after the Boston Marathon jihad murders perpetrated by two members of the Islamic Society of Boston. Wangsness is such a paragon of journalistic integrity that in January 2013, when I was scheduled to speak at a conference in the Roman Catholic diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, she actually exhorted people to call the diocese and ask that my talk be canceled. For that she should have been fired, but advocacy journalism in the cause of obscuring the truth about jihad terror is just fine with the Boston Globe.

And now she greets the first anniversary of the jihad massacre in Boston with this grotesque piece explaining how Muslims in the Boston area were “reassured” after the massacre, as if Muslims had been its victims. She has not written, of course, any piece about how non-Muslims in the Boston area were reassured after the massacre that none of her wonderful “moderate” friends at the Islamic Society of Boston would be involved in any more jihad terror mass murders. No, that simply wouldn’t have been proper. In the mainstream media, Muslims are always the victims, even when they’re the perpetrators.

Sept. 11, 2001, ruptured 13-year-old Hamza Syed’s world. Being Muslim instantly became the only part of his identity that seemed to matter; kids at his school in Lynn besieged him with questions he could not answer. He had immigrated to the United States from Pakistan at age 3, but he no longer felt allowed to call himself American.

A year ago, after the Boston Marathon bombings, Syed braced himself for another anti-Muslim backlash. It never happened.

“I grew up being an outsider, feeling like an outsider, and there wasn’t any moment really after the Boston Marathon where I had that feeling of being an outsider again,” he said. “I grieved with everyone. . . . I could understand their feelings, and they could understand mine, without there being an asterisk next to it.”

On Monday, Syed expects to run the Boston Marathon for the first time, an act he sees as an expression of his love for his resilient city and for its embrace of diversity.

“That is what the Boston Marathon this year is really going to be about,” he said. “I want to say that I was there, that I took part in it.”

To be sure, there were isolated displays of Islamophobia in the aftermath of the Marathon bombings. A woman wearing a hijab was assaulted on a street in Malden. Strangers sent hateful e-mails to Boston’s mosques. Some Muslims feared being questioned by law enforcement or seethed over a tabloid’s portrayal of two innocent Massachusetts men as possibly connected to the bombings.

But the broader tableau showed a city that has become more welcoming of Muslims in the years since the 2001 attacks, many local Muslims said. The scale of the two tragedies was very different, but many Muslims said improved interfaith cooperation and increasingly diverse schools and workplaces contributed to a change in tone. It also seemed, they said, that their non-Muslim neighbors had grown more knowledgeable and less fearful in a dozen years of discussing terrorism, war, national security, and religious liberty in the public square.

“Now, when an act of terror occurs, people can see it for what it is: someone exploiting religion, someone with serious issues,” said Jalon Fowler, a 38-year-old Muslim who ran in last year’s Marathon and will compete again this year.

After the Marathon bombings, many Muslims said they felt reassured by gestures of support and concern from friends and coworkers, from local politicians and clergy of other faiths. Bostonians, they said, seemed to understand that most Muslims were as horrified at the violence on Boylston Street as everyone else was.

“There is never a silver lining to mass murder, or attempted mass murder,” said Imam William Suhaib Webb, spiritual leader of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center in Roxbury, the city’s largest mosque. “But what we learned is, this is a really great city with incredibly sincere people.

“It was like, we’re together, we all anguish about what happened, and we are going to try to speak to the problem together.”

Mosque fears eased

Greater Boston’s two most prominent mosques were inundated with press calls and television cameras after the bombings, especially the Islamic Society of Boston in Cambridge, where suspects Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev occasionally worshipped.

Ismail Fenni, acting imam of the Cambridge mosque, tried to field reporters’ questions and to respond to the stunned congregation, few of whom had known the Tsarnaevs.

In eleven-plus years of Jihad Watch, I’ve never come across a story where leaders of a mosque said about an Islamic jihadist, “Yes, we knew him well, he used to come here all the time.” Instead, no one at the mosque ever knew the guy or laid eyes on him. In reality, you may recall that not long after the Boston Marathon jihad bombings, much was made of the fact that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had been thrown out of his mosque. That story was widely reported in a way that gave the impression that Tsarnaev had been expelled for his “extremism,” when in fact he just had a dispute with an imam, was thrown out once, and came right back not long afterward. But no one when that story was reported said, “We didn’t even know this guy, he hardly ever came here.” On the contrary, “the Islamic Society issued a statement to say that while the suspects were known to other worshipers, they could not have predicted their horrific bombing of the Boston marathon.” They saved the claim that few there knew the Tsarnaevs for the ever-credulous Lisa Wangsness.

“We were worried the name and the reputation of the mosque would be stained,” Fenni said in a recent interview.

“What we learned is, this is a really great city with incredibly sincere people,” said Imam William Suhaib Webb, of the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center.

Those fears eased as neighbors lent support in calls and e-mails. A couple of weeks after the tragedy, the mayor of Cambridge and other officials led a peace walk from City Hall to the mosque.

The Roxbury mosque was also caught up in a media barrage that turned ugly when USA Today and Fox News suggested the mosque was cultivating extremism.

But, here too, the community offered a balm: Neighbors sent notes. Felix G. Arroyo, then councilor at large, spoke at the mosque’s vigil for bombing victims. Messages of support from Jewish and Christian clergy poured in….

Yes, yes, but what if…what if the mosque is really “cultivating extremism”? That is a question that is beneath the notice of enlightened “journalists” such as Lisa Wangsness. Go back to sleep.

While I advocate deportation of Muslims, I don’t base that on their rejection of separation of church and state. I don’t even base it on their mere ideological belief in sedition. I base it on their tangibly demonstrable connection to terror attacks and terror plots in a matrix of an overall war against us that is escalating metastatically.

What you asserted, WVinMN, about the First Amendment is correct if one takes an “original intent” or strict constructionist view of the Constitution. In contrast to this approach is the “living, breathing Constitution” approach or view. Conservatives favor the former and liberals the latter. Being a conservative myself, I am very partial to the strict constructionist viewpoint though it is important that a person understand both viewpoints.

There is an additional matter where the First Amendment is concerned. This is the incorporation doctrine whereby large parts (but to date not all) of the Bill of Rights (considered at least the first eight Amendments and often times the Ninth and Tenth Amendmensts as well) have been made applicable to state and local government as well as to the federal government. Until 1897 the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government, but beginning in that year with a railraod case and really picking up in 1925 with the Gitlow case, the Supreme Court made more and more of the Bill of Rights incumbent upon all levels of government. The entire First Amendment has been “incorporated” and so anything about religion that the Supreme Courts says applies to the federal government now also applies to lower levels of government.

Jefferson writes: “I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people (the Bill of Rights) which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a WALL OF SEPARATION between Church and State.”

If Jefferson were alive today, he would not be a leftist nor use their language.

I agree with you, mortimer, about Thomas Jefferson. He was a classical liberal (in the modern era the closest to this is a true conservative like Ronald Reagan) and not a “leftist.” Modern leftism is something very different from classical liberalism. Beginning shortly after Jefferson’s death in 1826, liberalism began to be hijacked by socialistic sentiments, for instance Blanc’s or, even worse, Marx’s rot.

Modern leftism and classical liberalism actually have little in common, even though modern leftists would like to think, and often do claim, otherwise. A good example of the true difference between modern leftists and classical liberals is that the former wants more and more government while the latter insisted, as Jefferson did, that government is best which governs least.

Classical liberalism also really did prize liberty. By contrast, modern leftism, while pretending to want freedom, actually insists upon conformity along “accepted” lines of thinking—–or else. Political correctness and multiculturalism (pc/mc) is entirely an invention of modern leftism and only true conservatives, i.e., Jeffersonian liberals, have resisted this kind of faux freedom, this kind of totalitarianism posing under the guise of liberty. Unfortunately, many claiming today to be conservatives aren’t really such, and to the extent that they accept pc/mc nonsense it is demonstrative of how even modern conservatism has been corrupted by modern leftism.

So if you convert to islam then the media, police and local politicians will kiss your ass and shower you with money. If he was a protestant minister or catholic priest and said the same thing they would shower him with ridicule, call for his dismissal and possibly lock him up. BTW, go into any mosque for a while and you will be shocked at the amount of falsehoods and insults that you will hear about Christians and Jews.

Why did you become a muslim? Got something against foreskins? And in 2002, no less….Did you like the way those 19 fine fellows from 911 slit throats and flew planes into buildings? Does “Allahu Ackbar” sound like some kind of mating call to you? Why not just check yourself into rehab?

Muslims are in the U.S. for one reason and one only, to promote Islam! which is fine ,most faiths do this , some more aggressive than others. The Muslims I’ve met have all seemed polite and peaceful. What I see as a problem is they’re lack of tolerance towards other Religions. I’ve checked out the Qur’an and countless times ,especially chapter 9, it states there is no other religion than Islam and no other God than Allah then specifies various ways to punish “Infidels”from beheading to various ways to stoning them to death. In the Mosque on the Temple Mount on the rim below the done it outright states “death to all Christians” in other words “Jihad”. It also requires that ALL Muslims must participate in “Jihad” if not physically , then by monetary means. they all have blood on their hands and are all guilty of terrorism and promoting hate worldwide. Their treatment of women, children and the handicapped are despicable. There is no age limits on marriage and I have read of Muslims marrying girls as young as 9! Ever see a Muslim with Down syndrome ? Not likely under “Sharia law” they can put abnormal newborns to death. They hang Gays unless they are Jihad soldiers, then they’re promised “Infinite number of prepubescent boys with ample and firm bottoms” this is a quote out of a poem considered an Islam Holy book. So what we have here are women beating, bisexual statutory rapists, That kill whoever they want in the name of Allah or their honor. This country was founded on the premise of Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State. So Sharia Law should be outlawed, no questions asked. the Qu’ran and it’s condemnation of all things non-Islamic should be considered hate literature. I see no difference between Muslims and Neo-Nazis and should be treated as a hate organization! At the very least take away their Religious Non-Profit Status! Then see how much they have to spend on Jihad and their training compounds around America!

Just for know’in, imam Suhaib Webb is a convert to Islam as is CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper. In the video clip this homemade imam comes across as a hopeless dope. I guess his speech to CAIR is what passes for intellectual discussion of Islamic theology nowadays.

Don’t forget that the big mosque housing the Islamic Society of Boston was built with a big Infidel taxpayer subsidy that was illegal, but the pols were falling over themselves to get those Moslem votes. If Islam is so wonderful, why do they always have their hands out to mooch free money from us? And we got the Brothers Tsarnaev as thanks.

” You look at post modernity, there is one religion that is absolutely equipped from the ground up to engage the speed of a technocratic world, the speed of a world that is demanding freedom, it is not the Islam of the 10th century, it is not the Islam of the 6th century, it is the dynamic, pluralist, empowering Islam of the prophet’s era.”

Fine example of taqiyya and double speak from Imam Webb. Webb leaves you with the impression that Islam is uniquely ‘equipped’ to safely shepherd a fast moving world forward, and set free those who are oppressed, or enslaved, all this by Islam’s ‘dynamism, pluralism and empowerment’, which has of course never existed. Islam has been oppressive and stagnating for 1400 from its own self inflicted psychosis. Webb offers no hard evidence, facts or suggestions to back up how Islam, with its historic record of oppression, enslavement and backwardness can do this, except to say that the ‘Islam of the prophet’s era’ will do the trick. This is of course ludicrous and laughable. The ‘prophets era’ was 610 – 632 AD , the 7th century (there was no Islam in the 6th century), and pluralism never was then, or happened since. ‘Peaceful co-existence’ within an Islamic society means that minority groups do not have political, or economic power and are forced (those that managed to survive, or not be forced to convert) into dhimmitude.

Thanks for your spot-on remarks about this imams taqiyya and double speak.

( Let me add a third comment on Suhaib Webb’s “performance” of thug language & attitude culture. He probably thought that his inner city diatribe would not be seen outside of the CAIR treason festival. )

VIOLENT GANGS & SEXUAL PREDATORS ARE INTENDING TO OVERTAKE EUROPE. Watching this video of him I see that IMAM WEBB’s “TARGET AUDIENCE” is Boston wannabee violent Muslims — young minorities who would just love to engage in terror.

Here we go with yet another “educated fool” who reveals Muhammad’s pathology…

The Boston NPR station had a similar piece this week on Muslims in Boston pursuant to the marathon bombing (I’m sure it’s online). The whole piece was completely about the difficulties and successes Boston Muslims have had in being treated positively by non-Muslims in the wake of the bombing .

Even when I try to step out of my knowledge of Islam and jihad, and put myself in the shoes of the average layman who has little interest and knowledge of the subject—it still seems to me that a responsible question on the part of ANY journalist to this Muslim community would be “Why is it that these young men drew violent inspiration from Islam, and what specifically are you doing to counter that? Do you have any outreach program to teach against violent interpretations of the Quran and jihad?” But no, that question was never, ever raised.

For NPR and many other “news” sources, it honestly seems that the REALITY of the attack– that 3 people were murdered, many had limbs blown off and hundreds were injured–is a minor, inconsequential detail, and the theorized, hypothetical “intolerance” towards Muslims (which did not materialize, even by their own admission) is the REAL story.

I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but can anyone imagine if this had been a bombing by a white supremacist group, that NPR would have done an in-depth, sympathetic interview with the members and proudly denounced any criticism directed towards them as “intolerance”?

NPR is as deceitful as it is shameless.
I missed that piece BTP, but I heard part of a similar piece today.

The belated trial of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is finally approaching.
Get ready for the MSM (Media Dump). It has already begun.
NPR ran a story today exploring why the target of the public’s anger should be directed at the massive police presence and the curfew that cleared the streets of the Boston area after the attacks so they could better track the (Islamic terrorists) without the cover of traffic and people.

Yes, that is right they were ISLAMIC terrorists and we do have permission to be angry at them in spite of the MSM’s attempts to convince us otherwise with a PC substitute.
You can expect the MUSLIM leadership to run interference ad infinitum beginning with an insincere self-serving sort of apology to lead-in into a full on media barrage about the plight of poor misunderstood Muslims such as (Hmmm, who could it be) none other than Dzhokhar Tsarnaev surprise, surprise.
Local politicians will praise Boston as a resilient city without actuality mentioning the twisted ideology that it needs to be resilient from lest the risk appearing to be against interfaith cooperation
Get ready (it’s a coming)

Cambridge is the epicenter of liberal-left political correctness, multiculturalism and tiddlywinks. The Boston Globe is its ideological counterpart in the print media. No reporter for the Globe would have a job long should he or she in any way state, or even imply, that there is anything intrinsically violent or supremacist about Islam. Criticizing Islam is off limits according to their value system because they believe that all the bad in the world stems from Western racism .
Islam may call for warfare to subjugate unbelievers; it may demand that gays, apostates and blasphemers be beheaded; it may mandate stoning for adulterers or rape victims; it may permit wife beating; Muslims may call for Israel to be nuked, burn churches and slaughter Christians while they exult; terrorists may blow up half the city, but Muslims will accept anyone who converts without regard to race, and Islam is not “Western”. Case closed. Next.

Muslims are in the U.S. for one reason and one only, to promote Islam! which is fine ,most faiths do this , some more aggressive than others. The Muslims I’ve met have all seemed polite and peaceful. What I see as a problem is they’re lack of tolerance towards other Religions. I’ve checked out the Qur’an and countless times ,especially chapter 9, it states there is no other religion than Islam and no other God than Allah then specifies various ways to punish “Infidels”from beheading to various ways to stoning them to death. In the Mosque on the Temple Mount on the rim below the done it outright states “death to all Christians” in other words “Jihad”. It also requires that ALL Muslims must participate in “Jihad” if not physically , then by monetary means. they all have blood on their hands and are all guilty of terrorism and promoting hate worldwide. Their treatment of women, children and the handicapped are despicable. There is no age limits on marriage and I have read of Muslims marrying girls as young as 9! Ever see a Muslim with Down syndrome ? Not likely under “Sharia law” they can put abnormal newborns to death. They hang Gays unless they are Jihad soldiers, then they’re promised “Infinite number of prepubescent boys with ample and firm bottoms” this is a quote out of a poem considered an Islam Holy book. So what we have here are women beating, bisexual statutory rapists, That kill whoever they want in the name of Allah or their honor. This country was founded on the premise of Freedom of Religion and the separation of Church and State. So Sharia Law should be outlawed, no questions asked. the Qu’ran and it’s condemnation of all things non-Islamic should be considered hate literature. I see no difference between Muslims and Neo-Nazis and should be treated as a hate organization! At the very least take away their Religious Non-Profit Status! Then see how much they have to spend on Jihad and their training compounds around America!

Another truth revealed! Of course we “infidels” were never given any reassuranc by the muzzy community. Our lives don’t matter to them! If one of us is killed, it’s like a skunk getting run over in the middle of the road. The only concern, on their part, is harming a muzzy while gaining that fast track to paradise! This is really how they feel/think about us!!! WAKE UP!!

Robert Spencer FaceBook Page

Robert Spencer Twitter

Robert Spencer YouTube Channel

Jihad Watch® is a registered trademark of Robert Spencer. in the United States and/or other countries - Site Developed and Managed by Free Speech Defense

Content copyright Jihad Watch, Jihad Watch claims no credit for any images posted on this site unless otherwise noted. Images on this blog are copyright to its respectful owners. If there is an image appearing on this blog that belongs to you and do not wish for it appear on this site, please E-mail with a link to said image and it will be promptly removed.